ReviewJMIR AI2026
Natural Language Processing of Clinical Notes for Cancer Research and Patient Care Prior to Widespread Adoption of Generative AI: Scoping Review.
Review in JMIR AI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Using large language models to identify prediagnostic clinical features of ovarian cancer from healthcare records: a population-based case-control study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Clinical notes are the most abundant data type within electronic health records; however, their highly unstructured format presents significant challenges for supervised natural language processing (NLP) methods. The NLP community is increasingly adapting large language models to analyze clinical notes, achieving strong performance and generalizability with minimal task-specific fine-tuning. We conducted a scoping review of NLP methods applied to clinical notes prior to widespread adoption of generative artificial intelligence (AI) to establish a pre-large language model methodological baseline, showcase potential clinical utility, and highlight key challenges and limitations of extractive, supervised techniques that generative AI approaches may need to overcome. Objective: This review aimed (1) to characterize the clinical notes used, (2) to identify NLP techniques used to analyze these notes, (3) to determine the clinical applications of NLP in cancer research and patient care, and (4) to highlight challenges and limitations of traditional pregenerative AI methods. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science for English-language studies published from January 1, 2014, to March 8, 2024. Retrieved references were imported into Covidence, a web-based platform that streamlines management of reviews. Two authors (ABK and HRAE) independently screened studies for eligibility and extracted data using a predefined data extraction template. Results: A total of 226 studies were included in the review. Research using NLP to derive insights from clinical notes grew significantly, from 4 studies in 2014 to 43 in 2023. NLP methods have evolved from predominantly rule-based and ontology-driven approaches (2014-2017) to hybrid approaches that combine these with deep neural models such as Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (2018-2024). Most studies (161/226, 71.2%) developed their systems using small, single-institution datasets. Supervised learning approaches with manually annotated corpora were predominant (181/226, 80.1%). Most studies (174/226, 77%) focused on information extraction, with a few applying the extracted data to downstream tasks such as diagnostic and prognostic classification. Clinical domain pretrained models outperformed general domain pretrained models in the majority (11/16, 68.8%) of studies that evaluated multiple model types. In total, 25 studies compared their NLP-based systems with current practice in their respective clinical settings and reported potential benefits, including improved data coverage and completeness, faster information extraction, and improved classification or prediction accuracy. No studies evaluated the utility or impact of their systems in real-world clinical practice. The most common challenges reported by authors were restricted access to clinical notes (n=39) and limited data (n=18). Conclusions: The application of NLP to clinical notes in oncology has expanded, but most studies focus on information extraction rather than downstream clinical tasks. Oncology NLP has the potential to advance cancer research and patient care, but barriers remain to robust evaluation and clinical deployment of promising tools. Emerging generative AI approaches will need to overcome these challenges to deliver real-world impact.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.